RE: deaft-gree-sedsh-ecc-08: small correction

"Igoe, Kevin M." <kmigoe@nsa.gov> Fri, 13 August 2010 15:52 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C532F3A68F6 for <ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Aug 2010 08:52:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2Zd9blIsWaX7 for <ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Aug 2010 08:52:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mollari.NetBSD.org (mollari.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:230:48ff:fed3:af12]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B94F3A6803 for <secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Aug 2010 08:52:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.NetBSD.org", Issuer "Postmaster NetBSD.org" (verified OK)) by mollari.NetBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEBB570905 for <secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Aug 2010 15:53:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 0705963B100; Fri, 13 Aug 2010 15:52:46 +0000 (UTC)
Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org
Received: from msux-gh1-uea02.nsa.gov (msux-gh1-uea02.nsa.gov [63.239.65.40]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34FC163B104 for <ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org>; Fri, 13 Aug 2010 15:52:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from MSCS-GH1-UEA01.corp.nsa.gov (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by msux-gh1-uea02.nsa.gov (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id o7DEpvMM009258; Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:51:57 GMT
Received: from MSIS-GH1-UEA06.corp.nsa.gov ([10.215.228.137]) by MSCS-GH1-UEA01.corp.nsa.gov with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:51:39 -0400
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Subject: RE: deaft-gree-sedsh-ecc-08: small correction
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:51:39 -0400
Message-ID: <80F9AC969A517A4DA0DE3E7CF74CC1BB034A7E@MSIS-GH1-UEA06.corp.nsa.gov>
In-reply-to: <80F9AC969A517A4DA0DE3E7CF74CC1BB034A7D@MSIS-GH1-UEA06.corp.nsa.gov>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: deaft-gree-sedsh-ecc-08: small correction
Thread-Index: Acs6s7WsNzunHQcfQKGGBDhPKlApTQAMylpgAAOc5aA=
References: <80F9AC969A517A4DA0DE3E7CF74CC1BB034955@MSIS-GH1-UEA06.corp.nsa.gov> <alpine.BSO.2.00.1008131523540.29473@fuyu.mindrot.org> <80F9AC969A517A4DA0DE3E7CF74CC1BB034A7D@MSIS-GH1-UEA06.corp.nsa.gov>
From: "Igoe, Kevin M." <kmigoe@nsa.gov>
To: "Igoe, Kevin M." <kmigoe@nsa.gov>, Damien Miller <djm@mindrot.org>, Douglas Stebila <douglas@stebila.ca>
Cc: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Aug 2010 14:51:39.0796 (UTC) FILETIME=[09530540:01CB3AF7]
Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org
List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org
Precedence: list

Opps, mea culpa.  I see are referring to draft-green-secsh-ecc-08, now
known as RFC 5656.  My responses were in reference to
draft-igoe-secsh-x509v3-05.

Given it has already been published as an RFC, the inclusion of MQV is
Suite B is an historical artifact that reflects the early genesis of
Suite B, and as such can stand.

The point at infinity is a worthy observation perhaps best 
addressed by an errata? I'm not terribly familiar with the IESG errata
process.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org [mailto:ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org] On
> Behalf Of Igoe, Kevin M.
> Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 9:06 AM
> To: Damien Miller; Douglas Stebila
> Cc: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org
> Subject: RE: deaft-gree-sedsh-ecc-08: small correction
> 
> You are correct, MQV was thrown out of Suite B some time ago
> and we should rephrase this statement to reflect that.  I
> view leaving MQV in this draft as harmless.  Yes, currently
> there are Intellectual Property issues involving MQV, but that
> may well change in the future.
> 
> As to checking for the point at infinity in ECDH, I'd
> rather have that issue addressed in a document that is
> clearly directed at ECDH rather than having it hidden
> in a document that only peripherally touches ECDH.
> I'll be putting out a "Suite B for Secure Shell" document
> in the near future and plan to cover such issues in there.
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org [mailto:ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org]
On
> > Behalf Of Damien Miller
> > Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 1:30 AM
> > To: Igoe, Kevin M.; Douglas Stebila
> > Cc: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org
> > Subject: Re: deaft-gree-sedsh-ecc-08: small correction
> >
> > On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, Igoe, Kevin M. wrote:
> >
> > > In the Introduction to draft-green-secsh-ecc-08 we find
> > >
> > >    In the interest of adding Suite B algorithms to SSH this
> document
> > >    adds three ECC Suite B algorithms to the Secure Shell arsenal:
> > >    Elliptic Curve Menezes-Qu-Vanstone (ECMQV), Elliptic Curve
> Diffie-
> > >    Hellman (ECDH), and Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm
> > >    (ECDSA), as well as utilizing the SHA2 family of secure hash
> > >    algorithms.
> > > Slight error here: ECMQV is no longer part of Suite B.  For sake
of
> > > correctness, I'd suggest something like the following:
> > >
> > >    In the interest of adding Suite B algorithms to SSH this
> document
> > >    adds two ECC Suite B algorithms to the Secure Shell arsenal:
> > >    Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman (ECDH), and Elliptic Curve
Digital
> > >    Signature Algorithm (ECDSA), as well as utilizing the SHA2
> family
> > >    of secure hash algorithms. Additonally, support is provided for
> > >       Elliptic Curve Menezes-Qu-Vanstone (ECMQV).
> >
> > Why not drop ECMQV from the draft entirely? AFAIK it is patented,
> > which is enough to stop us (OpenSSH) from implementing it. I think
> > new KEX methods need a very good justification, since they represent
> > a significant part of the pre-auth attack surface.
> >
> > Also on the -08 draft, shouldn't the client and server in ECDH
reject
> > public keys from the peer that are points at infinity? Are there
> > other degenerate values to worry about?
> >
> > -d